Brigittology for Dummies

A review of the book 'BECOMING BRIGITTE' endorsed by Candace Owens

I don’t mind being called a conspiracy theorist. The killing of JFK was a conspiracy, and 9/11 was a conspiracy, and I wrote theories on both, so I’m a conspiracy theorist. I don’t reject any conspiracy theory on principle. Even looking into those which are obvious nonsense can teach you something about the extent of human gullibility or about the techniques of cognitive infiltration. So in 2023 I looked into the theory that Brigitte Macron was born a man. I concluded it had a very low probability, and I told Xavier Poussard and anybody who asked for my opinion. But I didn’t want to spend any more time on it.

However, I now feel some kind of responsibility to read and review Xavier Poussard’s book, Becoming Brigitte, published last month with the endorsement of Candace Owens. So I bought the original French version, read it in a day, and posted my first impression on March 12, in an ironic tweet saying: “After 292 pages, the ultimate proof!”

On this page 293 the author compares a photo of Brigitte Macron and a photo of her older brother Jean-Michel Trogneux at age 18, and declares them identical:

While the wide-rimmed, thick-lensed glasses make the photograph largely unusable by facial recognition, we note at least two distinctive features that further confirm that the individual born Jean-Michel Trogneux is no longer a “little fatty” but has indeed become “Brigitte”: the upturned nose and the mouth in general, particularly the lower part of the cutaneous-mucous junction line.

What else could I do, but ironize about such assurance?

Given the (predictable) reactions to my post, I’ve decided to read the book a second time and give a more detailed review here. The book, after all, is supposed to be the best presentation of the arguments that Brigitte is a man.

I’ll only deal with the book’s main thesis (the transgender thesis), which is not addressed until halfway through, from part IV. The first half of the book is, in my view, a bit of messy journalism, which pulls out all the stops to create a general picture of the pedophile-friendly world of French politics. Nevertheless, it is informative about Emmanuel Macron’s background, though I’m not able to judge the originality of the information.

The main thesis of the book is that Brigitte Macron (BM) was born Jean-Michel Trogneux (JMT), in February 1945 and not in April 1953. Jean-Michel became Brigitte in the mid-1980s. Brigitte Macron is therefore an 80-year-old transgender woman.

I will not repeat what Vincent Reynouard, a very rigorous and respected truth-seeker about the technicalities of the Holocaust, has said in this short video (with English subtitles), about the unreliability of Poussard’s use of the Chinese software for facial recognition Face++, except to mention that Poussard is guilty of retouching certain photos to make his point, for example by artificially introducing “a dental problem” (p. 275) that supposedly proves that JMT as a child had the same dental gap as BM. How did Poussard get from the photo on the left to the one on the right?

As far as the thesis itself is concerned, it fluctuates considerably, and it’s hard to keep track of its evolution. There are several versions in succession. First, there’s what Poussard calls “the Rey thesis” (p. 165), somewhat cavalierly distancing himself from Natacha Rey, since he originally endorsed her thesis, drawing thousands of people into his conviction. Based on her intuition that Brigitte Macron is a transgender man, Rey thought she recognized her in a family photo of the Trogneux, as being Jean-Michel Trogneux (first row left) and not the girl on her mother’s lap, who is supposed to be Brigitte. I reproduce here this photo for the record, in a colorized and retouched version. This part of the thesis so far has not changed: Poussard still believes it. That the features of the young Jean-Michel Trogneux fit those of Brigitte Macron is the bedrock of the science of Brigittology.

Then, following the trail of BM’s mysterious first husband, André Auzière, Natacha Rey discovered a certain Jean-Louis Auzière, who was the former husband of a certain Catherine Audoy, and she decided that the two Auzières were one and the same. According to Rey’s imagination, Catherine Audoy was, in a previous marriage, the wife of Jean-Michel Trogneux, before he changed sex to become Brigitte Trogneux. Catherine Audoy therefore is the real mother of the three children (Sébastien, Laurence and Tiphaine), of whom Brigitte Macron claims to be the mother, whereas she is their father. Rey believes that, following Jean-Michel’s transition to Brigitte, Catherine Audoy’s second husband (Jean-Louis = André Auzière) adopted her three children, changing their names from Trogneux to Auzière.

The three children now find themselves with two mothers, a real one and a fake one, the real one being erased from their biographies while the fake one becomes their official mother, though she is their father. It’s hard to imagine what could have convinced the children to go along with this charade, renouncing their birth names, and adopting that of someone with whom they have no biological connection—and little emotional connection, according to the authorized biography. But above all, we’d like to know how they managed to have their civil status (birth certificates and family records) changed. These are the major objections I expressed to Xavier Poussard in 2023.

I now discover in the book (pp. 193-208) that Poussard finally abandoned this theory, having been convinced that Catherine Audoy never had children. What’s more, the software Face++, on which Poussard had staked so much, validates at 81.161% (very high) the identity of the young André Auzière in Brigitte’s wedding photo, with the bald André Auzière who appears on his death announcement (p. 196-201), and who can in no way be the Jean-Louis Auzière husband of Catherine Audoy, contrary to what Ray had maintained.

Out goes the Catherine Audoy-Jean-Louis Auzière lead, which seemed so promising, which Poussard had long supported, and which had done so much to propel the rumor to national prominence.

There remains the thesis that Brigitte Macron is Jean-Michel Trogneux. That’s the constant. But then who, if not Catherine Audoy, is the mother of Brigitte’s three children? The final thesis on which Poussard settles is not clearly stated until the end of the book, pp. 295-300. Brigitte Macron was born Jean-Michel Trogneux on February 11, 1945. But before Jean-Michel changed sex and name, there had been a real Brigitte Trogneux, born on April 13, 1953 (of whom we have a photo from her First Communion and a photo of her wedding to André Auzière in 1974), but whose correspondence with our Brigitte Macron according to Face++ is only about 50% (low) (p. 235), which Poussard takes as proof that these are two different persons (ignoring the factor of facial plastic surgery, that Brigitte is known to have received).

The real Brigitte Trogneux, Poussard claims, died in the mid-1980s, and her brother Jean-Michel then assumed her identity, while Brigitte’s death was kept secret, without a death certificate or a tomb. According to Poussard’s script, the real Brigitte Trogneux, “knowing she was doomed by a serious illness, entrusted the custody of her children and her identity to this brother to whom she was so close and who had always felt like a woman.”

We can therefore conclude that Jean-Michel Trogneux has been living, since at least 1986, under the civil birth identity of his sister Brigitte Trogneux. Logically, Sébastien, Laurence and Tiphaine Auzière are his nephew and nieces. Overall, “Brigitte” cleaned up her past (Jean-Michel Trogneux) and told her sister’s past when it came to presenting herself to the French.

What has changed from the first thesis (the Rey thesis disavowed by Poussard) is that Brigitte Macron is no longer the biological father of her children, but their biological uncle. This implies that the children have accepted that their late mother’s death be concealed (no funeral, no mourning, no tomb, etc.) and that she be replaced by their transgender uncle. But why would they agree to be burdened with such a twisted family secret? And why would the grieving widower agree to replace his wife with his brother-in-law? I couldn’t find any answers in Poussard’s book.

Two mysteries remain. Firstly, how could the real Brigitte’s death have been concealed? Was there no death certificate? Was the body buried in the Trogneux’s garden? Secondly, how did Jean-Michel Trogneux manage to disappear? Although I can’t find any mention of this in the book, it’s probably safe to assume that this second mystery is solved by the third mystery, the biggest of all: who’s the Petit Gros, the rather shy, “small chubby guy” that appeared on several occasions among the Macrons’ guests, and whom everyone claim to be Jean-Michel Trogneux? Poussard doesn’t say. But the only explanation, in the context of his hypothesis, is that he was hired, based on his looks, to “play” the Jean-Michel who had actually morphed into Brigitte.

In Poussard’s scenario, Brigitte Macron is Jean-Michel Trogneux, but not the father of Sébastien, Laurence and Tiphaine Auzière. New question: did Jean-Michel Trogneux have children? Yes, answers Poussard, this time going along with the official story (why?). Jean-Michel Trogneux had a son named Jean-Jacques Trogneux with a certain Véronique Dreux. Poussard was able to get confirmation of this on the phone from Véronique Dreux, who tried in vain to convince him that her ex-husband was not Brigitte Macron. He has a lot of faults, she implied, but not that one. And she certified that he is the Petit Gros. But for Poussard, this Véronique Dreux must be part of the conspiracy: she’s lying.

Then comes an exciting new chapter. Poussard mentions (pp. 314-5), with photo support, that this Jean-Jacques Trogneux (son of Jean-Michel) and Emmanuel Macron, look like brothers. Now, if Emmanuel Macron is Jean-Jacques Trogneux’s brother, and if Jean-Michel Trogneux is Brigitte Macron, this would mean that Emmanuel Macron married his own father. Poussard doesn’t formally validate this thesis, but he does mention it (what’s the point?).

I hope I’ve made myself clear. I may have missed some details. Please correct me in the comments. Some details, by the way, are totally insignificant, like “the mystery of the lampshade” deleted from some versions of the Trogneux family photo above (p. 257). Ah ah! Why erase the lampshade, if not to hide the fact that Brigitte is a man?

Poussard’s arguments often demonstrate an obsession to fill a prosecution case with everything he can get his hands on, including actual objections to his thesis. Here, for example, is how he turns evidence to the contrary into proof of his thesis (pp. 310-1). It turns out that Jean-Michel Trogneux was best man at Brigitte’s first wedding and that Brigitte was best woman at Jean-Michel’s wedding. Does this prove that they are two separate people? No, thinks Poussard.

But far from torpedoing our investigation, this information would, on the contrary, document the close proximity between Brigitte and Jean-Michel Trogneux. Indeed, we now knew that they had witnessed each other’s weddings. Brigitte Trogneux was therefore the key to Jean-Michel’s life, and vice-versa.

How daring! And that’s not all. The fact that a complete copy of Jean-Michel Trogneux’s marriage certificate was obtained by a journalist is in itself reason to doubt its authenticity!

Above all, providing a journalist with the full version of the marriage certificate was a very special and exceptional treatment, as it was contrary to the law. A town hall can only issue this type of document—a copy of a full marriage record—to a third party after a period of 75 years has elapsed (2055 in this case), or 25 years from the date of death of one of the spouses, whichever is shorter (which is not the case here). Obtaining this document was therefore totally abnormal, and its sole purpose was to strike a blow against Natacha Rey’s thesis by including Brigitte and Jean-Michel Trogneux in the same document, failing to show them visually together in the past...

In other words, if a journalist obtains proof that the thesis is false, it’s a clue that the thesis is true. This is a mode of reasoning that has unfortunately become widespread in the marshes of conspiracyland.

Some believers comment on their “intimate conviction” that Brigitte is a man. I reply that an “intimate conviction” is very powerful, but difficult to distinguish from religious faith. In this case, what is the basis of their conviction? A “body of corroborating evidence”, they tell me.

In reality, the body of evidence is pretty flimsy. I can list only four clues:

- Emmanuel Macron’s mother, Françoise Macron-Noguès, was a doctor specialized in the pathology of “primary congenital pseudohermaphroditism” (p. 130).

- Brigitte Macron sought the services of Dr. Patrick Bui in 2019, a specialist in “feminization of the facial skeleton in the context of transsexualism”, and “male-to-female sex reassignment surgery”, whom Macron decorated with the Legion of Honor on October 10, 2023 (p. 107).

- In an interview for the celebrity magazine Gala in autumn 2021 entitled “Brigitte Macron, le féminisme et moi”, Amanda Lear says she introduced Brigitte Macron to an app for retouching photos (p. 171). The detail is only significant if we admit that Amanda Lear, a French music star of the eighties, is a transsexual, which is a mere rumor.

- Brigitte Macron once quoted the line “Nobody’s perfect” from the film Some Like it Hot, saying it was her favorite movie (p. 187).

It’s a rather meagre set of clues, and not enough to support the hypothesis that Brigitte Macron is Jean-Michel Trogneux. The number of forged administrative documents (birth, marriage and death certificates), forged articles and forged testimonials that this hypothesis presupposes is considerable, and Poussard has not been able to demonstrate the slightest forgery. The alleged scale of the conspiracy of lies in the family circle of the Trogneux and Auzière families is also disproportionate.

At best, the body of evidence justifies the more banal hypothesis that Brigitte Trogneux suffered from a certain sexual identity disorder. Perhaps she even suffered from “primary congenital pseudohermaphroditism”. In this hypothesis, the meeting between Brigitte and Emmanuel would not have taken place at the “Lycée de la Providence” where Brigitte was a French teacher and Emmanuel a 14-year-old bright student, but at the medical practice of Emmanuel’s mother, Dr. Françoise Macron-Noguès. This is one possibility. But then we’d have to check the inconsistencies in the official high school legend.

On reflection, I think that Brigitte’s biography may not be all that doctored, and that, if she has decided not to make public any photos from her adolescence, there may be a simple reason, consistent with her own testimony of having been “a teenager in pain” (p. 145). What’s suspicious about this testimony? It’s also quite possible that there’s a family secret in the Trogneux family that explains certain grey areas. It’s a very common occurrence.

In conclusion, I’m at a loss to understand how Poussard could allow himself to be dragged so unabashedly into a thesis based on so few clues and so many implausibilities? Why didn’t he, at some point, pick up and move on? One reason is, of course, Poussard’s own cognitive limitations. There’s an obvious lack of objectivity in his arguments, and a propensity to over-interpret trivial details, or even invent non-existent clues. For example, he claims that Brigitte Macron lied when she said she was 8 years old when her older sister Maryvonne died, because he chooses to believe that Maryvonne died in 1960, whereas she died on February 24, 1961, less than two months short of Brigitte’s eighth birthday.

There is also a general tendency to trust that, since mainstream news are always lies, “the truth is out there”, in the fringe Internet. And the darker and the weirder is sounds, the truer is must be. This has become a general trend, encouraged by Deep State cognitive infiltration, as I pointed out in my article “Dark Pill: How Satan-Worshipping Pedophiles Have Taken Over Conspiracyland.” Poussard believes, for example, that Michelle Obama is a man, and, as far as I can see, most people who fell for the Brigitte hoax did so because they had already become convinced about Michelle.

The main reason for Poussard’s lack of objectivity, I think, is his very marked Trumpist tropism. He was impressed by the media’s announcement that Trump had “intelligence” on Macron’s sex life (p. 242). He is under the spell of the QAnon narrative, which Suzie Dawon has very accurately described as a “Pied Piper” operation (read also Caitlin Johnstone’s article), Poussard believes that Candace Owens is part of Trump’s public relation apparatus and that her opinions have the endorsement of the Oval Office. So having been interviewed by her, he is convinced that Trump will, sooner or later, provide definitive proof that he’s right—just as Trump is expected to declassify the files on Epstein and JFK!

I’m not blaming him. Who could keep a cool head with such sudden celebrity? I hope for his sake that he will regain his composure and, being still young, will be able to learn from his mistake and move on. For the moment, I find it significant that he recently retweeted the following comment posted in response to my tweet:

The fact is that the most powerful services in the world (Russian and US) and the Trump team, made up of exceptional people, have validated Xavier Poussard’s work since August 2022.

Poussard is simultaneously convinced that he is working for the truth and that he is working for Trump, Putin & Co, and these two convictions tend to get mixed up in his mind. He has lost touch with reality. He lives in another world, an imaginary world in which he is writing history.

He doesn’t understand that if his thesis is picked up by pro-Putin media or pro-Trump commentators, it simply proves that he has given them a good joke to ridicule Macron and, through him, France.

For my part, I’ve never been able to rejoice that France has become the laughingstock of the world with this affair. I’m not concerned about Macron’s reputation. Macron is a sinister figure, recruited for a sinister project. And his marriage with his high-school French teacher is a disgrace enough. It’s about the truth. I’ve heard, more than once, that even if the rumor is false, its destabilizes those in power, and that’s a good thing. Are lies and defamation legitimate political weapons? Without me.

If this story were true, if it were even probable, it deserved to be told. But that’s not the case: it’s certainly not totally impossible, but it’s highly improbable, and Poussard’s presentation of it is misleading. His investigation is a fiasco. It doesn’t serve the truth and hasn’t helped the French understand what’s happening to them. It has entertained them, and it has made people laugh the world over. But the time for jokes is over. A world war is looming in Europe (with, of course, the déjà-vu secret understanding that the US will join in when begged to) and Brigitte’s dick won’t hold the attention of future historians.